What About Our Girls – And Where Were (are) the Men?

By Dr Dawn Malotane Lindsey

Male Responsibility, Power, and Positive Masculinity in the Wake of High‑Profile Sexual Exploitation Cases

Part II of: Male Responsibility vs Positive Masculinity

Executive Summary

Recent high‑profile sexual exploitation scandals involving powerful men have reignited a global question: What about our girls—and where were the men? This paper builds on the framework established in Part I and expands the discussion toward accountability at the highest levels of influence. It examines systemic male complicity, the normalization of exploitation, and the bystander silence that enables abuse. Using global data on sexual violence and trafficking, this paper argues that prevention requires a shift from passive masculinity to active responsibility—rooted in positive masculinity, accountability, and protection.

Building on Prior Work

As established in Part I (Male Responsibility vs Positive Masculinity), engaging men is essential to violence prevention. Evidence from bystander and norms‑change programs demonstrates measurable reductions in perpetration when men are trained to intervene and model accountability.

1) The Context: Sexual Exploitation and Elite Complicity

Global estimates indicate that approximately 1 in 3 women experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime (WHO). UNODC reports that women and girls account for the majority of detected trafficking victims globally, with sexual exploitation being the most common form. High‑profile cases involving wealthy and politically connected individuals have demonstrated how abuse can persist not merely because of one perpetrator, but because of networks of enablers, silence, and normalized misconduct.

2) What Should Male Responsibility Have Looked Like?

Male responsibility in such contexts should have included:

• Immediate reporting of suspected exploitation.

• Refusal to participate in exploitative environments.

• Public and private rejection of exploitative norms.

• Protection of vulnerable individuals rather than protection of powerful peers.

• Accountability within peer networks.

Research on bystander intervention demonstrates that men are more likely to intervene when peer norms support action.

3) What the Data Reveal About Gender and Power

• The majority of sexual violence perpetrators are male (CDC; WHO), though most men are not perpetrators.

• Intimate partner femicide is most commonly perpetrated by men (UNODC Global Study on Homicide).

• Coercive control and power imbalances are key predictors of lethal escalation.

• Silence among male peers is a documented risk factor in abuse cultures.

4) Positive Masculinity as Prevention

Positive masculinity reframes strength as protection, courage as accountability, and influence as stewardship.

It requires men to:

• Interrupt harmful behavior among peers.

• Challenge exploitative language.

• Mentor younger men in consent and ethical conduct.

• Support survivor‑centered justice.

Evidence‑based programs demonstrate that when men engage in structured accountability and empathy‑building, rates of perpetration decrease and bystander action increases.

5) The Role of Empowerment Self‑Defense (ESD)

Empowerment Self‑Defense strengthens girls and women through awareness, boundary‑setting, verbal skills, and escape strategies. ESD also integrates male engagement components, recognizing that prevention is collective. By combining female empowerment with male accountability training, communities create layered protection systems.

Conclusion: Where Were (are) the Men?

The failure in high‑profile exploitation cases was not only individual—it was cultural. Silence and power insulated abuse. The future of prevention depends on men redefining masculinity as responsibility, protection, and accountability. The safety of our girls depends not only on empowering them—but on demanding more from our men.